[Ccwg-auctionproceeds] [Ext] Re: Proposed Agenda - new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG meeting on 16 November at 14.00 UTC

Marilyn Cade marilynscade at hotmail.com
Wed Nov 15 22:11:49 UTC 2017


i think we can address that, Maureen, in criteria for the Board for the new foundation, which is what I favor as the mechanism.


We could establish a criteria of at least two from regions, and also from sub regions on the board.


I am going to go for more than one person on the board to note that we need many from the sub regions and regions.


For North America, for instance, I am not the person, but someone from the indigenous peoples could be.


Marilyn


________________________________
From: Maureen Hilyard <maureen.hilyard at gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2017 4:13 PM
To: Marilyn Cade
Cc: Vanda Scartezini; ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] [Ext] Re: Proposed Agenda - new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG meeting on 16 November at 14.00 UTC

But Marilyn, can I just add that you would be hard pressed to find a representative from from one of the under-served regions that Vanda and I are focusing on. within these large organisations, and this is our point.

We need to be able to ensure that there will be someone on this Board who will understand the needs and circumstances of our underserved regions.

In the past I have found it difficult to even access an application form for these larger foundations, especially those that are US-based because most of us in the Pacific for example, don't have any connection with the US, so we don't get any priority. It would be imperative that our processes are inclusive and user-friendly so that  all levels of society and all types of communities can be benefit from these funds, and at the same time increase the outreach of ICANN into these regions. .

Therefore in the interests of all, it is important for us to at least be able to ask Vanda's question.

On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 9:47 AM, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com<mailto:marilynscade at hotmail.com>> wrote:

I am just looking into a number of different donor organizations -- and for instance, some have board members that are representative of

multiple regions, and some have staff that have experience in working in different countries. Sometimes a Foundation is based in a country where the primary donor base is located -- e.g. I have found a few that are based in their country of origin in Europe, but their focus is funding development in developing countries.   That happens also for the US based Foundations, if the primary contributor (s) are homed in that country, and they are taking advantage of the legal and accountability environment.


That to me is not the question we should be asking: we should be asking what can we learn from you and your approach to managing the solicitation of applications, and the review process; the award process, and the monitoring and evaluation process, including required reports on results, transparency, criteria for Board members, staff members, etc.




________________________________
From: Maureen Hilyard <maureen.hilyard at gmail.com<mailto:maureen.hilyard at gmail.com>>
Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2017 2:38 PM
To: Vanda Scartezini
Cc: Marilyn Cade; ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org<mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org>

Subject: Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] [Ext] Re: Proposed Agenda - new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG meeting on 16 November at 14.00 UTC

+1 Vanda

On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 9:37 AM, Vanda Scartezini <vanda at scartezini.org<mailto:vanda at scartezini.org>> wrote:
I would like to add to Marilyn’s concerns, that I agree, a question to someone to answer: Which are the requisites  for any American Foundation ( or other From any developed country) to apply resources in developing countries projects?

Vanda Scartezini
Sent from my iPhone
Sorry for typos

On 15 Nov 2017, at 17:16, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com<mailto:marilynscade at hotmail.com>> wrote:


I understand,Erika, however, Gates may be too big to be considered representative. Very large donor organizations have very large

overhead, for instance, and I know that will be a strong concern to this community.


Smaller donor organizations often have less overhead, and can be closer to the purpose for which a fund is created.


We can develop a set of standard questions and do interviews that not everyone can attend, but we can get a set of questions that we ask of each

invited.


Marilyn




________________________________
From: Erika Mann <erika at erikamann.com<mailto:erika at erikamann.com>>
Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2017 11:50 AM
To: Marilyn Cade
Cc: Marika Konings; Seun Ojedeji; ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org<mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] [Ext] Re: Proposed Agenda - new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG meeting on 16 November at 14.00 UTC

Marilyn -

we have the Gates Foundation on our list and I checked with them if they're willing to do this. Not sure if we need therefore another big one?

I agree with you, learning is always good but we need to keep in mind that we need to be able to handle these additional conference calls. Let's discuss tomorrow how many calls we want to have with different experts and how diverse we want these calls with different fund/foundation environments to be.

Thanks for all the effort,
Erika

On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 3:43 PM, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com<mailto:marilynscade at hotmail.com>> wrote:

Marika,with apologies for delayed suggestions:

I tried to add in a couple of ideas of experts, and found I can't figure out how.


I nominate Alliance for Affordable Internet [A4AI]; Mastercard Foundation; and IEEE Foundation for additional conversations.  I do note that we are not including yet some of the major funders, such as Microsoft, MasterCard Foundation, IBM, and perhaps a few more that I am not well aware of.


I know that I have only been a participant for the last 6 meetings, and regret that I missed some earlier discussions so apologize to be bringing in new thoughts at this late date.


In my view, learning about how funds are dispersed, and evaluated should be our priority, not picking a particular model. So, I would

suggest that even if in the future, some of these groups we are learning from might apply for Auction fund supported projects,

we need not limit our learning. Also, we must not limit our learning to only those who are affiliated with some of us, and I say that gently, but sometimes the road ahead is illuminated by a new lamp. :-)






________________________________
From: Ccwg-auctionproceeds <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces at icann.org<mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces at icann.org>> on behalf of Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org<mailto:marika.konings at icann.org>>
Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2017 8:22 AM
To: Seun Ojedeji
Cc: ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org<mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] [Ext] Re: Proposed Agenda - new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG meeting on 16 November at 14.00 UTC


Seun, the experts that have been identified by the CCWG to date can be found here: https://community.icann.org/x/DAnfAw<https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcommunity.icann.org%2Fx%2FDAnfAw&data=02%7C01%7Cmarilynscade%40hotmail.com%7C276f224728b241b2ed5c08d52c2bee57%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636463489544503941&sdata=H65gTN6C1y8Fp%2BfHRU9zJYBy97ap504BGM781oo1FL4%3D&reserved=0>. This also includes an overview of the expertise present amongst CCWG members and participants.



With regards to next milestone, please review the updated timeline that was circulated with the agenda. This document also includes the approach for dealing with the charter questions that the CCWG is following.



The survey was intended to see whether a clear preference existed amongst the CCWG members and participants for a certain mechanism. However, as there does not seem to be a clear preference, the CCWG will need to start digging deeper in order to eventually make a determination about the preferred mechanism. This was the objective of the exercise in Abu Dhabi: identify overarching criteria that are expected to determine what mechanism is preferred as well as identify what further information is needed with regards to the different mechanisms to be able to value these criteria. For example, several commenters noted that cost is an important factor in determining which mechanism is preferable, but at this stage, the CCWG has very little insight into what the expected cost (e.g. set-up, running) of each mechanism may be. Experts, who have been involved in setting up similar mechanisms may be in a position to provide guidance to the CCWG in this regard. This is of course only one factor that has been identified as important.



If there are suggestions for how to move forward quicker on making this determination or other parts of the work that can be done in parallel (the leadership may have some suggestions during tomorrow’s meeting), these should be shared so that these can be part of the conversation concerning the work plan. I do note however that there are still some outstanding items from stage 2 that need to be completed and are awaiting CCWG input so moving faster will only be possible with the assistance of everyone involved.



Best regards,



Marika



From: Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com<mailto:seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>>
Date: Wednesday, November 15, 2017 at 02:39
To: Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org<mailto:marika.konings at icann.org>>
Cc: "ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org<mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org>" <ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org<mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org>>
Subject: [Ext] Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Proposed Agenda - new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG meeting on 16 November at 14.00 UTC



Hello Marika,



Please note a tentative apology. That said, could you remind me again who the experts are, are those ICANN staff if not are they paid category of people within this CCWG?



To the Chairs, I raised this during the face 2 face and I think I should ask again here; can we have an idea of what the next milestone of the group is supposed to be and in what timeline are we supposed to achieve that.



I am saying this because I feel we are getting too bugged down with documentations that seems repeatitive to me. We earlier did a survey about the options, then we put that on pause and did the session at AbuDhabi which produced yet another documentation with new set of questions (which are similar to what was already answered through the previous survey)



Regards

Sent from my mobile
Kindly excuse brevity and typos



On Nov 14, 2017 6:03 PM, "Marika Konings" <marika.konings at icann.org<mailto:marika.konings at icann.org>> wrote:

Dear All,



Please find below the proposed agenda for the next new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG meeting which has been scheduled for Thursday 16 November at 14.00 UTC. Please make sure to review the documents attached, especially the document for item 4. You are encouraged to review the questions identified in this document for accuracy (do these accurately reflect the comments that were provided during the F2F meeting) as well as whether there are any questions missing.



Thanks,



Marika



Proposed Agenda – new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG meeting on Thursday 16 November at 14.00 UTC



  1.  Roll Call
  2.  Welcome / DOI – SOI Updates
  3.  Completing stage 2:

     *   Review of updated examples document (see attached)
     *   Open and Interoperable Internet description (DT expected to circulate latest version prior to meeting)
     *   Discuss next steps

  1.  Stage 3 – review and refine questions for experts (see document attached)
  2.  Review and discuss updated work plan (see attached)
  3.  Confirm next steps and time/date for next meeting (Thursday 30 November at 14.00 UTC)



Marika Konings

Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)

Email: marika.konings at icann.org<mailto:marika.konings at icann.org>



Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO

Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses[learn.icann.org]<https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttp-3A__learn.icann.org_courses_gnso%26d%3DDwMFaQ%26c%3DFmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM%26r%3D7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM%26m%3DvepTnIDWQE-1_wU1ZNVYdsNAc6cx7b-vFjWlkUlclT8%26s%3DX3l3Apo_nTVALzVbUsINnj4dLIV2o2MTrJKgZrode0I%26e%3D&data=02%7C01%7Cmarilynscade%40hotmail.com%7C276f224728b241b2ed5c08d52c2bee57%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636463489544503941&sdata=5q%2BHPZ6kD5zcwPeb6%2FFjb5hRE0BiV5IJjIgteBtKWBg%3D&reserved=0> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages[gnso.icann.org]<https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttp-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_gnso.icann.org_files_gnso_presentations_policy-2Defforts.htm-23newcomers%26d%3DDwMFaQ%26c%3DFmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM%26r%3D7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM%26m%3DvepTnIDWQE-1_wU1ZNVYdsNAc6cx7b-vFjWlkUlclT8%26s%3Dl14iSIzzv6UlziggAMSm2I0ydzP1aL4siEoxnlXJHvg%26e%3D&data=02%7C01%7Cmarilynscade%40hotmail.com%7C276f224728b241b2ed5c08d52c2bee57%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636463489544503941&sdata=i%2B7l%2BVwsU7J8RDes9N%2F223sU63lYIXTbLBZ4jhBkR78%3D&reserved=0>.



_______________________________________________
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds<https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmm.icann.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fccwg-auctionproceeds&data=02%7C01%7Cmarilynscade%40hotmail.com%7C276f224728b241b2ed5c08d52c2bee57%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636463489544503941&sdata=halopt%2FxAn3p9KWzGVHIxr%2FN83IvDc%2FhXosSQz8XP7A%3D&reserved=0>

_______________________________________________
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds<https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmm.icann.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fccwg-auctionproceeds&data=02%7C01%7Cmarilynscade%40hotmail.com%7Cd436e3ed48c94e34ef0608d52c490567%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636463614479585359&sdata=fjMn0qJxhruIoqnkTgVuFa00TGuUPcZZAjxLojEtqow%3D&reserved=0>

_______________________________________________
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds<https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmm.icann.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fccwg-auctionproceeds&data=02%7C01%7Cmarilynscade%40hotmail.com%7Ca7523d4d6a2648f7729a08d52c608496%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636463715401073596&sdata=h%2BUOznR9R%2FAA5JgfE0FzwUdSlhS%2F7I7WN4u3Lsg2ipk%3D&reserved=0>

_______________________________________________
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds<https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmm.icann.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fccwg-auctionproceeds&data=02%7C01%7Cmarilynscade%40hotmail.com%7Ca7523d4d6a2648f7729a08d52c608496%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636463715401073596&sdata=h%2BUOznR9R%2FAA5JgfE0FzwUdSlhS%2F7I7WN4u3Lsg2ipk%3D&reserved=0>


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-auctionproceeds/attachments/20171115/d80edee9/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list